web analytics

So to speak

An editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal under the headline, “The Ferguson Exception” says that instead “of applying predetermined racial template to every episode” each case should be judged on its merits. Then the editorial argues rather dramatically and forcefully:

“Reality is contingent and fact-specific.”

We have given this thought. What, might one suppose, is reality contingent upon? Such contingencies have plagued mankind since the dawn of time and the emergence from the ether of ignorance of a fact-specific world. Perhaps it is facts, specific facts as opposed to general facts, which presumably have little or no bearing on reality, possibly contingently and specifically factual, as opposed to being unspecific fact-wise, which in reality might not be reality, but fantasy-specific. We cannot thrive in a fact-generalized world, that is to say (just to clarify matters) an unfactual-specific world. If facts were aspecific in the sense of amoral, we might not be troubled by the specificity of factualness. This might mean that factual specificity in reality lacks specific achieveability-ness, at least insofar as contingencies may be involved. But these things should have no bearing on predetermined application in which templates do not merit consideration in a reality-contingent predetermined world where racial templates are not fact-specific and lacking the contingent of reality.

We owe the Journal a specific debt of reality-based gratitude for such clarity concerning the contingent nature of reality and its specific facts. And that we indeed should look at such matters on a case-by-case basis, judging each upon its merits and contingent realities.